Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thinking about this, they're probably gonna introduce "insecure but cheap" instances for customers that don't mind the chance of data leaks and takeovers...
That would be hard to market.
Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
121–130 of 159 posts
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#122We have disabled Hyper Threading(HT) on all public facing servers(running OpenBSD). However, our compute nodes running Linux kernel are benefiting about 80 to near 100% boost for specific scientific workloads. So, we run our INTERNAL NETWORK ONLY compute nodes with HT on. In places where security is not primary concern, why not make use of HT for extra efficiency? Think and plan before you blanket disable HT on all s…
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#123It's not clear that he's using "SMT" to refer to AMD specifically as he goes on to talk about "Intel CPUs" and disabling it in "Intel BIOS". Does the Zen architecture have the same issue?
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#124Does this mean AMD hyperthreading has a performance + security advantage over currently shipping Intel processors? Edit: https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/security-updates > 8/14/18 – Updated: As in the case with Meltdown, we believe our processors are not susceptible to these new speculative execution attack variants: L1 Terminal Fault – SGX (also known as Foreshadow) CVE 2018-3615, L1 Terminal Fault – OS/SMM (also k…
With the newer AMD processors having as many real cores as they do, does the cost-benefit analysis of HT/SMT change? I read in a comment here a few weeks ago that turning it off on the newer AMD CPUs can yield better performance because of improved cache-coherency on some workloads (My memory of what I read might be totally wrong).
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#125Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#126Scary looking headline on a discussion forum with instructions to perform a task that the average user would not really understand, with no explanation of attack vector or even consequences for any user who doesn't want to take the time (and energy, frankly at this point) to follow security news. I'm pretty close to not caring anymore. I hope somebody figures out how to at least fix the security news infrastructure,…
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#127Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#128Does anyone know the best way to disable hyperthreading on Linux?
/sys/devices/system/cpu/smt
/sys/devices/system/cpu/smt/active
/sys/devices/system/cpu/smt/control
active: Tells whether SMT is active (enabled and siblings online)
control: Read/write interface to control SMT. Possible
values:
"on" SMT is enabled
"off" SMT is disabled
"forceoff" SMT is force disabled. Cannot be changed.
"notsupported" SMT is not supported by the CPU
If control status is "forceoff" or "notsupported" writes are rejected.Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you fully trust the software you're running, I see no reason to disable HT. At this point, I don't think I'd have it running on anything publicly facing, though. That said, I still have it enabled on my work PC & home PC.
Do you fully trust all the JavaScript you run?
Re: Disable SMT/Hyperthreading in all Intel BIOSes
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be hard to market.
Indeed, the idea of "Security" is not negotiable when marketing. Imagine buying a car that says, "Save $5000 for a less safe version without airbags." Yes, I know Airbags are DOT requirement, just trying to make a point. Edit: I think people are missing my point. I am not saying they don't sell cheaper models that are less safe. My point is that they don't ACTIVELY market them as such. Point me to an advertisement th…